Protesters target Confederate monuments, flag
North Carolina is completely within her rights to retain or get rid of the SCV plate. But getting rid of it, while retaining an a Ruritan or Rotary Club plate, sure looks like viewpoint discrimination to me, especially in light of the SCV explicit and repeated condemnation of racial superiority. It is not what one said that matters, it is what an opponent misinterprets what one said that matters. Heck, I'm offended by the existence of an Auburn plate in North Carolina.
From the article: "Triangle historian Tim Tyson said he 'was weary of a history' that only tells one side of the Civil War story." Okay, I would think, tell some other side of the story, like erect monuments to the USCT from North Carolina that fought. I'd bet lots of North carolinians would support that. But, Mr. Tyson and the embarassed North Carolinians in the article would prefer to remove the side of story he does not like and substitute his one side of the story.
For the record, here is the proximate cause of North Carolina's withdrawal from the Union: Tarheels would not be party to deliberately and palpably violating the Constitution, and for that we now must wipe out their memory.
April 15, Secretary of War Simon Cameron, acting of President Lincoln's order, demands North Carolina provide two regiments of soldier to invade the southern states and overthrow their elected governments.
North Carolina is completely within her rights to retain or get rid of the SCV plate. But getting rid of it, while retaining an a Ruritan or Rotary Club plate, sure looks like viewpoint discrimination to me, especially in light of the SCV explicit and repeated condemnation of racial superiority. It is not what one said that matters, it is what an opponent misinterprets what one said that matters. Heck, I'm offended by the existence of an Auburn plate in North Carolina.
From the article: "Triangle historian Tim Tyson said he 'was weary of a history' that only tells one side of the Civil War story." Okay, I would think, tell some other side of the story, like erect monuments to the USCT from North Carolina that fought. I'd bet lots of North carolinians would support that. But, Mr. Tyson and the embarassed North Carolinians in the article would prefer to remove the side of story he does not like and substitute his one side of the story.
For the record, here is the proximate cause of North Carolina's withdrawal from the Union: Tarheels would not be party to deliberately and palpably violating the Constitution, and for that we now must wipe out their memory.
April 15, Secretary of War Simon Cameron, acting of President Lincoln's order, demands North Carolina provide two regiments of soldier to invade the southern states and overthrow their elected governments.
"Whose side are you on," indeed?Governor John Ellis said:
